On Sun, Jun 05, 2011 at 01:35:46AM +0200, Christian Lohmaier wrote: > Only Oracle could add another license to the mix, but if everyone > subscribes to the apache-proposal, and thus shows their support for > the apache license, why should Oracle even consider to re-license?
The horse is out of the barn. Oracle has submitted a signed software grant to the ASF. Once the process completes, that code becomes available under the Apache License 2.0, a *permissive*, attribution-based license. Oracle cannot now impose additional copyleft restrictions by adding a new license to the mix. Suppose that theoretically, Oracle were to declare tomorrow that in addition to the ALv2, the OOo codebase would now also be available under the GPL. That action would not prevent the formation of the new Incubator podling at the ASF, because it could be done under the terms of the signed ALv2 software grant. Once you've granted a permissive license, you can't take it back. Disclaimer: I participate in ASF projects, but I'm speaking as just some guy on the internet trying to help everybody out. Marvin Humphrey -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
